runescapeclansfandomcom-20200215-history
RuneScape Clans Wiki talk:All editors are equal
User Type Colors I would like to discuss a policy for Admin and Bureaucratic colors, as the AEAE policy has no mention of this whatsoever I believe a community input on this is necessary. I believe it is necessary because the system was laid out as such in the first place and to suggest that there is truly no point in Administrators and Bureaucrats having separate colors if others are using them as well. 00:48, November 2, 2010 (UTC) : "We are the same and should be treated the same." - I believe this means that all users are entitled to the same rights and thus they should be allowed to use any color they want on their signature. 00:51, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :*Yet by that argument someone could argue it means everyone is an administrator or no one is an administrator but we know that to not be the case. As great as it may sound, no statement that "people are created equal or made equal" has even been legitimate. As well, as I said, what is the use of having specific colors for different user types if people can simply go along as the color those users are adhering to? 00:54, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :**Administrators are users entrusted with extra tools, in no way do they have more or less rights than regular users or even IP addresses, the hilite is used to help newer users distinguish between users with extra tools and normal users.' Do not ever think that an admin has more power than a normal user.' 00:57, November 2, 2010 (UTC) *I think that it's rather clear who is a sysop and who is not, as a hilited name comes up everywhere, as opposed to just signatures. It is rather easy to determine who is an administrator and who is not. If this becomes a problem, I believe we should create a link to RuneScape Clans Wiki:Administrators on the dropdown menu or somewhere else accessible. 00:55, November 2, 2010 (UTC) ::*I am not stating that an administrator is above another, I am simply stating that a substantial difference is existence and that we should distinguish that. 01:00, November 2, 2010 (UTC) ::**As Stone pointed out, the hilite system seems to keep us informed about who is and who is not an admin. 01:03, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::*Yet, as I continue to ask, what is the point of the user type colors if they are not adhered to? 01:05, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::**As I stated above, hilited usernames are used to help newer users to distinguish between users with extra tools and normal editors, a signature is not equated in this fact otherwise shouldn't Dark Forcez's name be in pink on his signature? 01:07, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::Wannabe, we all know the only reason you're against this is because you don't want to change your sig. color. As to this argument, can I first ask who was it that proposed that Admins/B'crats have certain colors and how many were in support. Or better yet, a link to the forum will help. With this information, we can see whether a majority of the community is in favor or against. 14:48, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::*It wasn't a community decision. The founder of the wiki attempted to implement it, we just fixed it. 14:57, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::*Then let us put it to a vote now. Whoever gets the majority of votes changes the idea to their favor. Deal? 20:50, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::**That's not the point. We're discussing whether it would violate the policy. If you have something constructive to add, do so now. 20:54, November 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::*From what I have read and from what I've believe from what I have seen in other wiki's: Most wiki's separate the people who have more editing rights, compared to normal editors, in more ways than one. One of these ways, as stated above is to colour code the names and links for admins and 'crates and other access types. Nowhere on this wiki though does it state any such rule or regulation as being 'official'. I personally believe it does not matter about colour coding because it's very simple and easy to notice who and who does not have these editing rights. Colour coding the names, in my opinion, is just another way for admins and 'crates to 'stand out from the rest'. As the forum name states, all editors are suppose to be treated equal and in this, I believe that includes being able to use any colour you want for text, names or links. The problem other users are saying (from what I've read) is that people won't be able to tell who has these 'advanced editing rights'. Solution: Make a link on the main page to a page with a list of all the active admins and 'crates so there is no confusion. : You don't have to stand out to be noticed. Thanks, 07:45, November 3, 2010 (UTC) : Or perhaps instead of color coding the names, we could have Admins/Crats add that they are what they are in their name template. 11:11, November 3, 2010 (UTC) Red Dog31, essentially what you want is something like this:B'Crat [[User:Zerouh|'ゼロウ']] Talk __ UT 20:49, November 3, 2010 (UTC) And is that bad? It looks pretty good 02:26, November 4, 2010 (UTC) : I never stated my opinion. 20:41, November 4, 2010 (UTC) ::Trying to limit signature colors is bloody ridiculous. People aren't stupid; no one is going to mistake someone for a b'crat because their signature is green. The name hilites on page histories, however, are there to make it as easy as possible for less experienced users to identify admins/b'crats. 20:50, November 4, 2010 (UTC) ::*For new users benefits why not have the crown of the respected editing rights to be included in the signature? (agrees with the above) 03:40, November 5, 2010 (UTC) ::*I think that the userbox and hilite are enough. 10:49, November 5, 2010 (UTC) ::**I agree with Stone. 21:07, November 5, 2010 (UTC)